Home/Court of Appeals of Texas/Chanoux v. Mesa Corp.

Chanoux v. Mesa Corp.

241 S.W.2d 741, 1951 Tex. App. LEXIS 2205
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 28, 1951
Docket4788
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 241 S.W.2d 741 (Chanoux v. Mesa Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Chanoux v. Mesa Corp., 241 S.W.2d 741, 1951 Tex. App. LEXIS 2205 (Tex. Ct. App. 1951).

Opinions

McGILL, Justice.

Appellee as plaintiff filed this suit against appellants and Mortgage Investment Company of El Paso, Texas, a corporation, as defendants seeking to reform a deed executed and delivered by appellee to appellants and a deed of trust executed and delivered by appellants to Mortgage Investment Company. Trial to the court without a jury resulted in a judgment granting reformation of both instruments. Appellants have perfected their appeal. The Mortgage Investment Company did not appeal.

At the request of appellants the court filed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The findings and conclusions deemed material to a proper disposition of this appeal will be hereinafter noticed.

The following facts appear from the findings and uncontroverted evidence: Ap-pellee, Mesa Corporation, was the owner of eight contiguous lots in Block 5 of Terry Allen Addition to the city of El Paso, Texas. A map of Block 5 showing the dimensions of these lots was on file in the front of Book 573 of the Deed Records of El Paso 'County. The property involved in this controversy is a portion of Lot 12, Block 5. In January, 1949, appellee had Mr. S. A. Colwell, a State licensed land surveyor, make a survey of the 8 lots in Block 5, including lots 12 and 13, which were adjoining lots. The lots were then vacant, and the purpose of the survey was to mark their boundary lines so that dwelling houses and other improvements might be erected thereon. This Colwell did, correctly staking out the boundary lines of lot 12 according to the footage thereof shown by the map and plat of Block 5 on file. The correct shape of lot 12, according to these dimensions was a “Pie shape”, with the front end of the piece of pie cut off, since the front of the lot faced St. John Road on a curve. The length of the boundary lines was approximately 55 feet fronting north on St. John Road, the west and east boundary lines extending generally in a southerly direction approximately 125 feet each, and the south or rear line being approximately 55 ft. plus 26 feet, the point between these distances representing a rather abrupt curve in the rear line. Lot 13 adjoins lot 12 on its east boundary. Colwell placed a stake on the south line of lot 12 at a point between the 55 foot and the 26 foot distances and also a stake at the other end of the 26 ft. distance which was the true southeast corner of lot 12 and southwest corner of lot 13. Thereafter, between January and June, 1949, appel-lee, which did its own building, began construction of a dwelling house and improvements on lot 12, and also a dwelling house and improvements on lot 13. Through mistake it supposed the stake placed between the 55 feet and 26 ft. distances was the common corner of lots 12 and 13, and built the garage which it intended to be appurtenant to and for use with the dwelling on lot 13, on the 26 feet of lot 12; it also erected from this point toward the front of lot 12 a rock wall which it supposed marked the east boundary line of lot 12. These improvements cut off of lot 12 a triangular strip approximately 26 feet on the rear of lot 12, and which converged to the northeast corner of lot 12 and the northwest corner of lot 13. After these improvements had been placed on the property by appellee, Colwell at the request of appel-lee made another survey for the purpose of showing the location of the improvements. He erroneously showed the garage to be located on lot 13 and the wall as being on the boundary line between lots 12 and 13. He furnished appellee with a sketch of his survey, certified to by him on June 17, 1949, which reveals this error. We here reproduce this sketch.

[743]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Zurich Insurance Company v. Bass
443 S.W.2d 371 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1969)
Chanoux v. Title Ins. Co.
258 S.W.2d 866 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1953)
Lander Lumber Co. v. Williams
250 S.W.2d 317 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1952)
Chanoux v. Mesa Corp.
241 S.W.2d 741 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
241 S.W.2d 741, 1951 Tex. App. LEXIS 2205, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chanoux-v-mesa-corp-texapp-1951.